2019 (3) TMI 495

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y, 2016 under section 143(3) determining the total taxable income of Rs. 16,05,970/-. The assessee filed original return of income on 30th September, 2013. The assessee, however, filed manual appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, noted that since the assessee filed return of income electronically, therefore, the assessee is required to file appeal in Form-35 electronically. The appeal of assessee was, therefore, held to be not maintainable and the same was dismissed by vide Order Dated 21st April, 2017. 3.1. The assessee in view of the above order dated 21st April, 2017 filed fresh appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on 15th May, 2017 through electronic mode against the assessment order dated 18th Febr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ee, after giving opportunity of being heard. Two more Orders of the Tribunal are also relied upon on the same preposition. 3.2. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that earlier his predecessor dismissed the appeal of assessee because it was filed manually vide Order Dated 21st April, 2017. The Ld. CIT(A), however, held that subsequent appeal cannot be adjudicated because appeal should have been filed against the earlier order of the Ld. CIT(A) before the Tribunal. The Ld. CIT(A) again dismissed the appeal of assessee in limine and his findings in para-5 of the order Dated 28th June, 2018 is reproduced as under : "5. It is noticed that after the appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by my Ld. predecessor vide order dated 21/04/2017, the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ival submissions of both the parties. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that at least the second appeal filed electronically should have been considered on merit by condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 5. The Ld. D.R, however, relied upon the impugned orders. ITA.No.5118/Del./2018 : 6. This appeal is filed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) Dated 21st April, 2017 which was dismissed because the appeal was not filed electronically. The Ld. CIT(A) held that appeal is not maintainable and the same was dismissed in limine. I, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in dismissing this appeal of assessee. 7. In the result, ITA.No.5118/Del./2018 dismissed. 8. However, as regards ITA.No.5828/Del./2018, it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X